Steve Wool, Plaintiff-appellant, v. William Hinkel; Barbara Zentz; Joseph P. Murphy; Janet A.brown; Stanley Friedler, Defendants-appellees, 833 F.2d 1006 (4th Cir. 1987)
Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- 833 F.2d 1006 (4th Cir. 1987)
Nov. 25, 1987
Before DONALD RUSSELL, CHAPMAN, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.
Steve Wool, appellant pro se.
PER CURIAM:
A review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal from that court's order dismissing the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is without merit. Because the dispositive issues recently have been decided authoritatively, we dispense with oral argument and affirm the judgment below on the reasoning of the district court. Wool v. Hinkel, C/A No. 87-1896-H (D. Md. Aug. 4, 1987).
AFFIRMED.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
